XRP SEC lawsuit complaint

[22bits]

https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2020/comp-pr2020-338.pdf

The SEC complaint against ripple XRP is really well written and basically an easier read than I thought it would be.  On page 28.  Only thing that might apply to BTC is this one section:

54. Both memos warned that XRP was unlikely to be considered “currency” under the
Exchange Act because, unlike “traditional currencies,” XRP was not backed by a central government
and was not legal tender.

Most of everything else applies to the company ripple promoting and selling the XRP which would obviously not apply to BTC or BCH since there is no company connection.

Thoughts? 

[1713537940]

1713537940

[avikz]

XRP is a centralized currency operated by a company called "Ripple". The entire debate with SEC is that SEC thinks XRP is a security rather than a currency. So SEC thinks that Ripple should have taken approval from US Securities and exchange commission before rollin out their XRP coin in US market. So Ripple's management will now have to go through a long and painful legal battle with SEC. Coinbase already announced to exclude XRP from their coin list.

This same argument doesn't apply to bitcoin for a simple reason as mentioned by you! Bitcoin is a ownerless currency system so they won't find anyone to prosecute! Unless Faketoshi wants to fight SEC!

[yhiaali3]

The strange thing is why this issue was activated at this time, although the XRP coin has been in the market since approximately 2014, there was a similar case almost in 2015 and it ended in favor of Ripple.
However, a spokesperson for Ripple responded to this accusation and sent an email:
Quote from: https://www.coindesk.com/sec-to-sue-ripple-over-xrp-sales-ceo-says

The SEC is fundamentally wrong as a matter of law and fact. XRP is a currency, and does not have to be registered as an investment contract. In fact, the Justice Department and the Treasury's FinCEN already determined that XRP is a virtual currency in 2015 and other G20 regulators have done the same. No other country has classified XRP as a security.

The SEC has permitted XRP to function as a currency for over eight years, and we question the motivation for bringing this action just days before the change in administration. Instead of providing a clear regulatory framework for crypto in the U.S., [SEC Commissioner] Jay Clayton inexplicably decided to sue Ripple – leaving the actual legal work to the next Administration.

Of course, Ripple said it was right, that it was within the rules of law, and that they would fight hard and win in the end. But nobody knows what the issue that caused the collapse of the price of the XRP will end.

[figmentofmyass]

The SEC complaint against ripple XRP is really well written and basically an easier read than I thought it would be.  On page 28.  Only thing that might apply to BTC is this one section:

54. Both memos warned that XRP was unlikely to be considered “currency” under the
Exchange Act because, unlike “traditional currencies,” XRP was not backed by a central government
and was not legal tender.

Most of everything else applies to the company ripple promoting and selling the XRP which would obviously not apply to BTC or BCH since there is no company connection.

Thoughts? 

it's irrelevant to bitcoin IMO. the SEC is only making making that argument to preempt ripple's claim that XRP could be deemed a "currency" under federal securities laws.

regardless of how the SEC defines "currency", bitcoin is almost certainly not a security, for other reasons.

[hv_]

Anything that 's getting (central) changed in its core and alters 'features' for all ->> SEC and others will consider as security , cause changers are responsible

Esp if dark 'feautres' chim in and make compliance / tax work harder


Spoken about also about 8min here  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpD3fsrM9T8

[idrisalomagold]

XRP is subject to lawsuit against SEC as Ripple company certainly established security without SEC's legal approval. Maybe Ripple think in the very beginning that they were just distributing crypto same with bitcoin as the latter is decentalized while the former is "centralized" to people. Thus, it is very clear that these distribution means providing liquidity to Ripple company by issuing XRP as shares. The solicitation of money resulted to illegal activities as per see cause again; there is no legal pursuits approved to SEC. Clearly this consitute to Ponzi scheme becuase considerably the first buyers of XRP may perhaps gain after selling it to new investors. However, XRP product has already listed on many crypto exchanges which makes sense that buyers/investors were looking great potentials and huge turnover as is difficult to address it as ponzi.

[22bits]

Yeah, the case seems incredibly strong against Ripple.  I didn't really have any opinion until reading the complaint, seems like a massive fraud pump and dump scheme.  Say you like came up with a stock and had 99 of your friends in on it to pump up the price, the victims are the sad few outside the circle that don't know what you are doing to manipulate the price of the stock.  In this case crypto.  My thinking is it does not look good for Ripple on this one because their 'use case' was not the main motivation behind the crypto but just a side show to make people think it was legit. 

[NotFuzzyWarm]

I have to agree with 22bits: Pure pump-dump of Tokens that mainly benefited those running the company.

Yes they created an open market for others to buy & sell the Tokens (after pre-mining a shitton of coins to stockpile before going public with their ICO) but, as with most altcoins aka Tokens, one company created and controls the tokens and executives behind the company directly profit from the sale of said Tokens and use some of the funds to finance the company. That makes their Tokens the same as stock shares. Ripple execs chose to ignore legal advice to register their offering as a security and now they have to pay the piper.

The fact that companies are creating new coins with the sole purpose of financing said companies is why the US, China, and other countries have cracked down on ICO's. They are essentially issuing unregulated stocks without the legal restrictions/protections true stock offerings must have.

As far as Bitcoin goes, I have to agree with the IRS and SEC input on it: It is treated as property same as gold, diamonds and other things that have high value and because there is no central issuing agency/country behind it, cannot be legally called 'currency'. However - companies doing business involved in the sale/exchange of said property DO have to meet certain regulatory criteria aimed at insuring all financial operations are open to audit and properly subject to gov regulators oversight.

[icopress]

No matter what anyone said, the SEC missed the moment when they could still dictate the terms of a company like Ripple ...

I would conduct a parallel with the SEC vs Telegram confrontation, and what did this process lead to .. Legal battles of this scale can last for years, such companies simply do not have a limit for their legal departments. And it doesn't matter who is right, the battles usually last until the official in charge of this process is removed from office or the company runs out of money ...

Why quote GateHub you ask? They are time-tested  

We have never believed that XRP is a “security” under the prevailing “Howey” test in the US, and regard XRP primarily as a “utility” token whose value is based on its use in payments and foreign exchange.  Our own business decision to list XRP -- and our attempt to build a payments business using XRP on the XRP Ledger -- reflects this good faith belief.

[Lorence.xD]

Yeah, the case seems incredibly strong against Ripple.  I didn't really have any opinion until reading the complaint, seems like a massive fraud pump and dump scheme.  Say you like came up with a stock and had 99 of your friends in on it to pump up the price, the victims are the sad few outside the circle that don't know what you are doing to manipulate the price of the stock.  In this case crypto.  My thinking is it does not look good for Ripple on this one because their 'use case' was not the main motivation behind the crypto but just a side show to make people think it was legit. 

The case is only strong against Ripple is because they have a creator to sue behind while Bitcoin does not have one. I do not think this BS of a lawsuit will lead to any progressive things, maybe if they can prove that it is not used for a better purpose, maybe they can get something out of it. Isn't that pump and dump present in bitcoin too?

[hv_]

Yeah, the case seems incredibly strong against Ripple.  I didn't really have any opinion until reading the complaint, seems like a massive fraud pump and dump scheme.  Say you like came up with a stock and had 99 of your friends in on it to pump up the price, the victims are the sad few outside the circle that don't know what you are doing to manipulate the price of the stock.  In this case crypto.  My thinking is it does not look good for Ripple on this one because their 'use case' was not the main motivation behind the crypto but just a side show to make people think it was legit. 

The case is only strong against Ripple is because they have a creator to sue behind while Bitcoin does not have one. I do not think this BS of a lawsuit will lead to any progressive things, maybe if they can prove that it is not used for a better purpose, maybe they can get something out of it. Isn't that pump and dump present in bitcoin too?

Some might say, if ppl deploy (soft) fork / change the token - changing whatever >> it is a total new thing == air  drop & tax event at least

Legal opinions ?

[Argoo]

XRP is a centralized currency operated by a company called "Ripple". The entire debate with SEC is that SEC thinks XRP is a security rather than a currency. So SEC thinks that Ripple should have taken approval from US Securities and exchange commission before rollin out their XRP coin in US market. So Ripple's management will now have to go through a long and painful legal battle with SEC. Coinbase already announced to exclude XRP from their coin list.

This same argument doesn't apply to bitcoin for a simple reason as mentioned by you! Bitcoin is a ownerless currency system so they won't find anyone to prosecute! Unless Faketoshi wants to fight SEC!

Over the years, executives of Ripple Labs have sold hundreds of thousands of unreported XRP coins, hiding this fact from the Ripple community who invested in this coin. In any case, it is very similar to abuse of their position.
In fact, they have already pleaded guilty, inviting the SEC to enter into negotiations over the lawsuit filed on December 22. Most likely, after paying billions of dollars in penalties, Ripple will return to normal.

[figmentofmyass]

The case is only strong against Ripple is because they have a creator to sue behind while Bitcoin does not have one.

ethereum has creators to sue but the SEC came out and said ETH wasn't a security.

obviously the case against ripple goes deeper than that. i think it has more to do with XRP investors' profits being completely tied to the efforts of ripple labs and their agents. from the SEC complaint:

Defendants’ statements and actions and the economic reality of Ripple’s relationship to XRP and of Ripple’s payments to third parties to help it achieve widespread trading of XRP has led and will continue to lead reasonable investors to expect Ripple and its cadre of experts to undertake significant and essential technical, managerial, and entrepreneurial efforts on their behalf.

after skimming through the complaint, i'm beginning to think they'll target binance's BNB next. it's huge (currently the #11 coin) and it ticks off the same boxes re the howey test, especially the scheduled token burns based on binance's profits.

[dansus021]

Over the years, executives of Ripple Labs have sold hundreds of thousands of unreported XRP coins, hiding this fact from the Ripple community who invested in this coin. In any case, it is very similar to abuse of their position.
In fact, they have already pleaded guilty, inviting the SEC to enter into negotiations over the lawsuit filed on December 22. Most likely, after paying billions of dollars in penalties, Ripple will return to normal.

And i hope so ripple will return to normal and also normal price too. I buy ripple at high price when the coin had announcement about flare network that give free FLR coin for XRP Holder and i still hold till SEC come to play and the price going down so deep shi* 

[icopress]

And i hope so ripple will return to normal and also normal price too. I buy ripple at high price when the coin had announcement about flare network that give free FLR coin for XRP Holder and i still hold till SEC come to play and the price going down so deep shi* 

The XRP rate will return to normal not earlier than in six months ... A bearish trend is looming and Jed McCaleb understands this given that he recently sold 28.6M XRP. While it may appear that the sale is related to the SEC lawsuit, I am sure it is not, (as I said earlier "Legal battles of this scale can last for years, such companies simply do not have a limit for their legal departments"). If you are a fan of conspiracy theories, then the quote below is just for you.

Conspiracy Theory #589: In deal w/IBM, IBM agrees to purchase Jed’s balance of XRP holdings. XRP price triples. IBM brings in GCohn, formally GS/Gvt to get favor from JC and put the brakes on XRP. How soon after Jed’s tokens are liquidated the "SEC" reaches a settlement?

[dansus021]

The XRP rate will return to normal not earlier than in six months ... A bearish trend is looming and Jed McCaleb understands this given that he recently sold 28.6M XRP. While it may appear that the sale is related to the SEC lawsuit, I am sure it is not, (as I said earlier "Legal battles of this scale can last for years, such companies simply do not have a limit for their legal departments"). If you are a fan of conspiracy theories, then the quote below is just for you.

Conspiracy Theory #589: In deal w/IBM, IBM agrees to purchase Jed’s balance of XRP holdings. XRP price triples. IBM brings in GCohn, formally GS/Gvt to get favor from JC and put the brakes on XRP. How soon after Jed’s tokens are liquidated the "SEC" reaches a settlement?

Where did you get this conspiracy theory. need more. I am fan conspiracy. But why IBM purchase jed balance when they know the price will going down

[icopress]

Where did you get this conspiracy theory. need more. I am fan conspiracy. But why IBM purchase jed balance when they know the price will going down

Find information on IBM World Wire and compare to Ripple solutions... and sometimes you should read not only Twitter announcements, but also comments to them, and by the way, here's something else interesting... Tetragon invested in Ripple knowing that XRP could potentially be classified as a security in the future, ("Tetragon seeks to enforce its contractual right to require Ripple to redeem Series C preferred stock").



Responsiveness ...

In Ripple’s Series C investment agreement, there is a provision that if XRP is deemed to be a security on a go forward basis, then Tetragon has the option of having Ripple redeem their Ripple equity. Since there has been no such determination, this lawsuit has no merit. We are disappointed that Tetragon is seeking to unfairly take advantage of the lack of regulatory clarity here in the U.S. The courts will provide this clarity and we are very confident in our position.

[dansus021]

Where did you get this conspiracy theory. need more. I am fan conspiracy. But why IBM purchase jed balance when they know the price will going down

Find information on IBM World Wire and compare to Ripple solutions... and sometimes you should read not only Twitter announcements, but also comments to them, and by the way, here's something else interesting... Tetragon invested in Ripple knowing that XRP could potentially be classified as a security in the future, ("Tetragon seeks to enforce its contractual right to require Ripple to redeem Series C preferred stock").



Responsiveness ...

In Ripple’s Series C investment agreement, there is a provision that if XRP is deemed to be a security on a go forward basis, then Tetragon has the option of having Ripple redeem their Ripple equity. Since there has been no such determination, this lawsuit has no merit. We are disappointed that Tetragon is seeking to unfairly take advantage of the lack of regulatory clarity here in the U.S. The courts will provide this clarity and we are very confident in our position.

Holy Sh** You are really thorough. So big company is come to play right now. first covid and now cryptocurrency as well. damnnnnnn

[In the silence]

Ripple should be responsible for their act since they know what they're doing from the start. Hence, Ripple stated that they will do everything to win at the end because it will be their end if they will wait for a long procedure to win against SEC.

[jaocoincrypto18]

Bitcoin is the first iteration of a decentralized digital currency that was created on a blockchain and long legal in the USA as it is recognized as a crypto currency. If XRP is deemed a security (Not backed up by the central government) instead of a cryptocurrency in the US  it cannot be used for cross-border payments where the United States is involved. I wouldn't say this kills the project, but it would cripple it in a major way because the United States is a major business partner everywhere in the world.